Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
LANSING — A bill preventing companies to require their employees to be microchipped passed overwhelmingly in the Michigan House Wednesday.
The "Microchip Protection Act," (House Bill 5672), sponsored by state Rep. Bronna Kahle, R-Adrian, aims to put limits on the implanting of rice-sized radio-frequency identification tags that could be implanted into humans to help improve workplace efficiency.
According to a House Fiscal Agency analysis of the bill, while microchips in pets have been around for decades and are ubiquitous, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approve the use of microchips in humans in 2004, originally intended to help doctors quickly access a patients medical record.
The microchips were soon developed to perform other tasks that could benefit businesses and workers. A Wisconsin company, Three Square Market, in 2017 became the first company in the U.S. to give its employees the option to receive implanted microchips. The implants were not required and only given to those who volunteered.
The chips replace I.D. badges, allowing employees to open doors without a key fob, clock in and out of work, log into computers and pay for food at the cafeteria.
So far, there has been no other company that has began using microchips in its employees, but some feel that its only a matter of time until companies could start adopting microchips as a requirement, violating privacy and right to work.
"With the way technology has increased over the years and as it continues to grow, it's important Michigan job providers balance the interests of the company with their employees' expectations of privacy," Kahle said in a news release Wednesday. "Microchipping has been brought up in many conversations as companies across the country are exploring cost-effective ways to increase workplace efficiency. While these miniature devices are on the rise, so are the calls of workers to have their privacy protected."
According to Kahle, seven states in the U.S. have already passed legislation banning mandatory microchipping, and since Kahle's bill was introduced in early March, Indiana passed similar legislation.
Under Kahle's bill, employers could utilize implanted microchips, but cannot mandate employees or prospective employees to be microchipped as part of their employment condition. Neither can they provide additional compensation or other benefits for employees who get microchipped or discriminate against an employee who does not receive a microchip implant. Further, employees or prospective employees can bring civil action against a company that violate these conditions.
Kahle said that she became interested in the issue after receiving a news article from a friend. After doing some research, she was convinced that the state has to act proactively.
"We're seeing a lot of rapid changes with technology across the board. And this legislation was introduced before we had the coronavirus shutdown and really another surge of technology as everybody was beginning to shift to operating at home," Kahle said in a phone interview Thursday. "Europe is really leading the way in this type of technology... . And it's voluntary right now, but it is becoming more and more popular there."
The bill passed the House by a 104-2 vote Wednesday and has gone on to consideration in the Senate. It has been sent for consideration in the Senate Committee on Economic and Small Business Development.
"The nearly unanimous support shows that it's never too soon for us to get ahead of this technology and just prepare a regulatory structure and framework that would protect our workers in Michigan from any type of surveillance from the employer or corporate surveillance," Kahle said. "Technology is on the rise and there's an increased reliance on computers ... and other forms of electronic intelligence. And I personally think its only a matter of time before microchips can become a norm in our society like we're seeing in some European countries."
JackRiddler » Wed Aug 12, 2020 5:00 pm wrote:Not that I know, and I have my own predispositions, but:
1. We don't know what horse's heads he found in his bed.
2. We don't know how bad the heart attack really was (nor did he, necessarily, in the immediate wake; this can take a long time). If only it had been dementia, as we have seen, he'd still be running.
3. It's minor, but since yesterday I've been unsubscribing from every group sending me e-mails jubilant about Kamala and the historic, justice, triumphant, blah-blah. I didn't ask to be on the list of any of these Democratic-affiliated groups, but got there, possibly by being promiscuous with (small) donations via ActBlue to Squad and Co., etc. Anyway, those are out, and it's a trivial sorting mechanism, but the e-mails I got from Sanders and AOC yesterday were both about real issues, and somehow omitted mentioning Kamala at all.
Minor, I know.
liminalOyster » Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:48 pm wrote:This is the first time in my adult life when, if I lived in an even maybe swing state, I'd puke up a vote for Biden/Harris and continue to detest them just the same.
JackRiddler » Fri Aug 14, 2020 12:00 pm wrote:liminalOyster » Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:48 pm wrote:This is the first time in my adult life when, if I lived in an even maybe swing state, I'd puke up a vote for Biden/Harris and continue to detest them just the same.
Through Trump, perfection of the vote-forcing system has been achieved. This is the peak, it will never again be exceeded.
Belligerent Savant » Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:53 pm wrote:.
Never say never. Trump may simply be a trend-setter for future elections.
Also: the inverse to Liminal's lament also applies: the Biden-Harris ticket will force voters to pull the lever for Trump.
The outcome in November may well have no bearing on the results of current polling (skewed as they tend to be, in any event).
Belligerent Savant » Fri Aug 14, 2020 12:53 pm wrote:.
Never say never. Trump may simply be a trend-setter for future elections.
Also: the inverse to Liminal's lament also applies: the Biden-Harris ticket will force voters to pull the lever for Trump.
The outcome in November may well have no bearing on the results of current polling (skewed as they tend to be, in any event).
JackRiddler » Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:40 pm wrote:Belligerent Savant » Fri Aug 14, 2020 12:53 pm wrote:.
Never say never. Trump may simply be a trend-setter for future elections.
Also: the inverse to Liminal's lament also applies: the Biden-Harris ticket will force voters to pull the lever for Trump.
Yeah, see, I don't buy that. Who among American voters are "Biden-Harris" (the Democratic National Tammany frontpersons, for the moment) threatening more than Trump is? Equally, sure. Risk of nuclear war in either case, sure. But who is threatened more by the Ds? Deluded adherents of the suburban lifestyle who think the Messican cartels are coming to take their stuff? People whose Medicare/SS is supposed to be cut under either choice of admin, but who seem to be missing that one of them is already calling for it right now and think he's their savior, draining the swamp? People who think they're going to be replaced by Jews and Blacks? Those who believe the protests against police murders and for reform are a Soros-led "color revolution" designed to destroy "America"? That the "China virus" and asking them to wear a mask are all a hoax? (Not that the C19 response is not being used to speed up the "fourth industrial revolution" massively.) Do you see the difference? Ds get to hold hostage voting clienteles because Rs credibly terrorize them with extra doses of the bad things that actually happen (and that both mob-parties support, but often to differing degrees). R voting clienteles hold themselves hostage because some preacher or Alex Jones type told them Sharia law is coming to Oklahoma, or voluntary birth control is murder.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests